Not so fast, Vigilanteman.
Posted on 12/27/2007 10:15:19 AM PST by Cinnamon Girl
From the Washington Post today:
McCain had been left for dead politically this summer, and now his decision to return to a state he skipped altogether in his 2000 bid for the White House is one of the many signs that the GOP contest for president is still in search of a front-runner.
McCain has surged back into a strong second place in New Hampshire, where former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, the GOP front-runner there, returned Wednesday in the hope of shoring up his eroding poll numbers. The two men traded angry, long-distance insults that signaled an abrupt end to the convivial Christmas messages that Republican hopefuls offered voters last week.
Sure we've mocked him, given him insulting monikers, raged against his gang of 14, his outspokenness against President Bush, his fondness for illegal aliens, his votes against the Bush tax cuts-- but John McCain, formerly of the Straight Guy Express, or whatever it was the last time he ran, could handily beat Hillary! if he gets the nomination.
You know why. He was bound to surge after his brilliant Christmas commercial which included footage of him in bandages, having suffered as a POW (click link above). He finally advertised his strongest asset. Men may admire him for his service and sacrifice for the country. Women want to nurture him and comfort him and make him feel better.
If you doubt this, consider the research of marketing expert Clotaire Rapaille, as showcased in the Frontline documentary "The Pursuaders." It's the gut emotional response, a deep seated connection that a person makes which propels them to purchase an item or in this case, make a vote. I'll bet Frank Luntz's dial technology would see the numbers go through the roof when McCain's Christmas ad is shown, especially when contrasted with the other ads.
Michael Medved made the case that McCain was right about the "gang of 14" in that he foresaw that Republicans would lose their majority and therefore would need to maintain filibuster rights. He also argued that McCain had a good case for voting against the Bush tax cuts. McCain claimed he was against tax cuts if there were no proposed cuts to the budget in kind.
McCain has been a "straight talker" lately, and whether you agree with what he says or not, he is refreshingly blunt. He was right about needing the surge in Iraq, and, although he is wrong about waterboarding, in my opinion, he can be forgiven by voters because of his unique perspective as a POW.
Independents like McCain. Women would not feel guilty voting for him over Hillary! because of his hidden emotional vulnerability, and the average white male would vote for him over any democrat.
I'm not saying McCain is my favorite at all; I'm just saying he's the one guy who could beat Hillary right now. If he did get elected, I would have serious concerns about his ability to be re-elected, however.
duncan hunter needs to do something. no ones tlakign about him.
him and fred are the only real conservatives running.
Well hell, if the Washington comPost says it it must be true. < /sarcasm>
Let’s say this. I will support the Republican nominee over the any of the DimocRATS. Question is Ron Paul really a Republican?
duncan hunter needs to do something. no ones tlakign about him.
him and fred are the only real conservatives running.
I agree... Except it’s “Fred and Duncan” ...
/grin
Go Fred!
Here is a link to the documentary “The Persuaders”: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/
add McInsane to the list
After all, it was his McCain-Feingold bill that put Soros in charge of American elections.
It was his enthusiastic embrace of amnesty for third world invaders that will make the Soros vision of an open society a reality.
As for his pesky support of victory in Iraq, that can easily be neutralized when the Democrats have enough of a majority to cut off all military funding.
I don’t know if he has a chance at the nomination, and I’d probably rather have Fred. But I agree, he would beat Clinton decisively in the election. Aside from the identity politics of being a womyn, her only asset is the vaunted but spurious claim of “experience.” McCain trumps that card without even having to get out of bed.
No he won’t. He has damaged his reputation too much.
I prefer, MeCain, party of one, ‘me’ all the time.
Not so fast, Vigilanteman.
Screw him. I’ve still got the scars in my back from all the knives he’s put there over the years. Besides, I don’t vote for ecotards.
That’s an interesting idea, but Hillary! would beat Edwards or Obama easily, especially if Ron Paul runs as an independent.
Why is it that everyone believes their guy is the only one who can beat Hillary? The only candidate who can beat Hillary will be the one who can unite conservatives and moderates. McCain can not do that simply because his stance on illegals is ridiculous.
This statement proves that McCain doesn't understand supply-side economics.
The only logical reason for this stance is that he fears tax cuts would cause reduced revenues to the government. Yet, all the evidence (JFK, Reagan, GWB tax cuts) suggests the exact opposite.
Not that spending cuts aren't a good idea in themselves. But, if McCain doesn't understand the dynamics of tax cuts, he's unlikely to sponsor any on his own.
This statement proves that McCain doesn't understand supply-side economics.
The only logical reason for this stance is that he fears tax cuts would cause reduced revenues to the government. Yet, all the evidence (JFK, Reagan, GWB tax cuts) suggests the exact opposite.
Not that spending cuts aren't a good idea in themselves. But, if McCain doesn't understand the dynamics of tax cuts, he's unlikely to sponsor any on his own.
So? One awful President would replace another. I would hope our party can do better than that.
The thing that's wrong with these polls is that they gauge support for "hold your nose candidates" from people they assume are already at the polls standing there voting. A whole lot of people are only barely motivated to go vote (but they will answer a pollster's questions from their comfy armchair in front of the TV.). For some people it takes a huge amount of incentive to get them off their rears. Such people simply don't vote at all when it's a "lesser of two evils" choice. It's why Reagan won by landslides when no one thought he would, and why Bush squeaked by in 2000 when the late polls showed him with a 10-point lead.
It's all about turnout. McCain would do far worse than this poll suggests
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.